69 points

I’ve been to places that had free municipal wifi, mostly at libraries and bus stops. It seems like a small service that is generally helpful to people without access to their own wifi. I think the better solution is to have more places with free wifi at night so people don’t have to congregate in the one small area.

There aren’t many places the unhoused are allowed to exist in public and cutting them off from essential services only makes it harder for them to better their situation.

permalink
report
reply
33 points

Internet should already be a human right at this point. It’s a treasure trove of information that really catapults someone who has access to it ahead of someone who doesn’t, meaning internet access is definitely an index of (in)equality.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The town nearest to me has free wifi on its main street AFAIK. Can see it being very useful for homeless people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

to better their situation

Well, that is, assuming they want to. Some, definitely. Long term loiterers, not so sure.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

So we should take away something that is necessary to someone helping themselves (have you tried to apply for a job or take a class without using the internet recently, it’s required), just because some people don’t care about living in squalor?

If all they are doing is “loitering” to use the internet, then they aren’t doing anything wrong. It sounds like the problem is simply the number of people and the neighbors didn’t approve. In that case, the truly win/win option is to provide greater access points to free wifi so people don’t have to congregate in one small area. This outcome only hurts people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

People who are addicted or who have given up to that degree are less likely to want help if they think real life can only be totally miserable for them (like, “the world is unbearable, there’s nothing good left for me except [drug name here]”). Same reason people who are depressed turn to drinking. Making the lives of unsheltered people even worse, thus making drugs more appealing in comparison, is counterproductive. And the longer they’re stuck in that, the more that’ll just feel like what life is to them.

Maybe people who don’t want to, or don’t act like they want to, better their situation actually would if they could see any hope for it, and if the path looked more doable and less like scaling mount everest with a broken leg.

I think anybody can think of times they didn’t want to do something that would benefit them - clean a house, do their homework, go to work in the morning - and other times that the situation was different and so it was much easier to do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

California wants to help the homeless but they also don’t want to pay for drug treatment, safe injection sites, or psychiatric centers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

California does, right wingers in California do not and they pay MASSIVE amounts of money for advertising campaigns to misrepresent drug treatment, safe injection sites, and psychiatric centers as free drugs and won’t somebody think of the children???

Do you want one of THOSE people to be getting help next door to you? Oh the horror! Don’t you know that junkies sneak off in the night, into your homes in order to stab your children with drug filled needles??? Do you have any idea what it’s like to be near a psychiatric center? I do. My brother’s nieces cousins uncle twice removed on her mother’s side told me that the crazies like to kidnap your children and vandalize your house.

Where did I put my pearls? I’m in desperate need of clutching them.

/Dripping Sarcasm Also source: I live in CA

permalink
report
parent
reply
51 points

Publicly funded but not for the public.

And before anyone makes a comment about the unhoused probably not paying taxes … neither do any of the children or retirees who use the service every single day of the year.

We’ve pretty much just abandoned any concept of citizenship or civic responsibility…

permalink
report
reply
28 points

Yeah, what the fuck are we paying taxes for if not to help those who aren’t or can’t?

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

getting a “protect my property value” vibes from this policy. Governing systems should focus first on lifting up our most vulnerable, and people selling houses just isnt it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

It’s only getting turned off at night, not completely disallowing them from using it. I don’t see what the problem is. I can’t go and take out a book at 1am, I shouldn’t also be allowed to use their WiFi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

you could check out an ebook using their services if you had access to wifi

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I live in a rural area without broadband access. Any quality broadband access. During the pandemic, kids sat in their parents’ cars (typically after they got home from work) to do their remote-learning homework in front of the public library to get free access to decent connection speeds AND access the library files electronically (for California check here https://www.library.ca.gov/services/to-libraries/ebooks-for-all/ - every state has an equivalent ). People, including kids, check out books (and periodicals) electronically 24/7.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

It was shocking to me just how prevalent lack of broadband is. I moved in with my in-laws in norcal midway through the pandemic and the only internet service choices were a 600Kbps DSL line or Verizon mobile hotspots at 3-5Mbps (which is a massive blessing in comparison). I worked remotely and would frequently have to drive to Target or a coffee shop in town to download anything. They aren’t even in that rural an area - there were houses about half a mile away with gigabit cable. The cable company wanted nearly $70,000 to build out a line.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Good lord. The pandemic shutdowns sucked for me (I have two kids myself), but the more I hear about other people’s experiences, the more I realize I really lucked out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Why not? It cost them next to nothing to leave it on. It actually is more work to turn off and on the router every day. I don’t see why not being to check out books had to do with internet. Why does it have to be all or nothing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I would guess all commercial routers and access points hae the option to automate something like that. So you only have to set it up once and it’s not really much work (unless something breaks)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Exactly this. A housed, or unhoused person, can’t use the library 24/7, so why should there be an exception for Wi-Fi at night?

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

because it costs $0 and unhoused people deserve access to education and resources at night same as those who are housed and have their own wifi?

this isnt about the wifi anyway, it’s an attempt to chase homeless people out of populated areas bc rich people are scared to be confronted with the human cost of their actions.

you’re fucking disgusting. i wish you the worst things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The reason the library isn’t open 24/7 is that it’s expensive to keep paying people to staff it for so many more hours, plus those are hours you’d have to pay even more because working at night sucks. The WiFi access point doesn’t have those issues. You can leave it on and help people for almost no money.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I can’t go and take out a book at 1am

I can. My library has online services like ebook rentals that can be accessed 24/7.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

absolutely no reason to do this other than to make the lives of people without housing harder.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

There are so many problems with this.

Far too many homeless people, there is so much wealth in this nation, there is no reason we cannot provide ample shelter. This probably is going to continue to become worse with the disproportionate wealth distribution and the continual increase in use or automation and AI.

Additionally, we should have broader access to wifi, specifically for those who are homeless and need access to online resources, so they can eventually no longer be homeless. Seems like a great federal program opportunity, if we actually want people to be able to recover from being homeless. No one is going to become homeless or stay homeless because of the badass government subsidized wifi.

This seems incredibly self perpetuating on the cities behalf. It’s like making places uncomfortable to sleep upon… Why not invest that money into someplace people can goto sleep and get the assistance they need to exist in society.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Seems like the white thing to do

permalink
report
reply

World News

!news@beehaw.org

Create post

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:
  • Where possible, post the original source of information.
    • If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
  • Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
  • Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
  • Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
  • Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community’s icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

Community stats

  • 1K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.9K

    Posts

  • 19K

    Comments